>
> On Dec 10, 2010, at 10:38 AM, Carrol Cox wrote:
>
>> But those attempts are a mistake. From a left political perspective (rather
>> than from the intellectual's armchair) the leaks only add more confusion to
>> the huge overload of information which is a barrier rather than an aid to
>> organizing. There is not one piece of information in the files of the
>> federal government the release of which would give even a whisper of aid to
>> the tasks of organizing
>
> I basically agree, but as several people have pointed out, the effects abroad may be more powerful than those in the U.S. Nigerians now know just how extensively Shell penetrated their gov; Australians now know that Washington had a stoolie in Canberra; Arabs now know that many of their govs were cheering on a U.S. attack on Iran. Etc. Of course, we sorta knew these things all along - but now we really *know* them.
Not a direct response to the above, but Geert Lovink's revision of his 10 (now 12) Theses on Wikileaks addresses this:
<http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2010-12-07-lovinkriemens-en.html>
What I thought most interesting was his statement: "What WikiLeaks anticipates, but so far has been unable to organize, is the “crowd sourcing” of the interpretation of its leaked documents."
"Thesis 5 The steady decline of investigative journalism caused by diminishing funding is an undeniable fact. Journalism these days amounts to little more than outsourced PR remixing. The continuous acceleration and over-crowding of the so-called attention economy ensures there is no longer enough room for complicated stories. The corporate owners of mass circulation media are increasingly disinclined to see the workings and the politics of the global neoliberal economy discussed at length. The shift from information to infotainment has been embraced by journalists themselves, making it difficult to publish complex stories. WikiLeaks enters this state of affairs as an outsider, enveloped by the steamy ambiance of “citizen journalism”, DIY news reporting in the blogosphere and even faster social media like Twitter. What WikiLeaks anticipates, but so far has been unable to organize, is the “crowd sourcing” of the interpretation of its leaked documents. That work, oddly, is left to the few remaining staff journalists of selected “quality” news media. Later, academics pick up the scraps and spin the stories behind the closed gates of publishing stables. But where is networked critical commentariat? Certainly, we are all busy with our minor critiques; but it remains the case that WikiLeaks generates its capacity to inspire irritation at the big end of town precisely because of the transversal and symbiotic relation it holds with establishment media institutions. There’s a lesson here for the multitudes — get out of the ghetto and connect with the Oedipal other. Therein lies the conflictual terrain of the political."